Author verhrzn Posted November 28, 2011 Author Posted November 28, 2011 I'm beginning to see why you have problems with men and relationships... Really. Please, spell it out for me.
donnamaybe Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Really. Please, spell it out for me. I think what it is is that there are people who think a partner is supposed to just let them do whatever the hell it is they want to do, such as live off of others rather than earn a living like the rest of us.
Feelsgoodman Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Oh, I see... So, I don't get to have any standards. I don't get to have any criteria at all, for example, "Guy I'm dating should have a JOB" because that would make me judgmental and materialistic. And even though I have a good job, and an education, because I'm physically unattractive, the only possible guys I could date are illegal aliens without even a college education who would date me for a green card. Because ANY man is better than NO man, even if that man is only dating ME because he himself is desperate. Is THAT what you're saying? You said, and I quote: "so, if you're considered a bottom league girl, what exactly are your options as far as dating goes if this is true?" If you indeed consider yourself a "bottom league girl", then yes, you should have very low standards. Why do you find that so shocking?
jobaba Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 (edited) Really. Please, spell it out for me. OK, I will. You had the cojones to post your pics. Every Tom, Dick and Harry on this website has said you are decent looking yet you refuse to acknowledge that and continue to wallow in self pity. I'd be thriving off compliments like that and using them as motivation to go find a man if I were you. You say you don't have standards but you really do. You call the guys you have dated ugly, geeky losers. I have seen the pics and they are decent looking guys. If you want somebody to be attracted to you for your looks, go for different guys. Or go for someone who doesn't care about looks as much. And you should not have that attitude about migrant workers. Think of it more like ... "They're ambitious people and I respect that, but the language barrier and compatibility would be too much to overcome in a relationship." I mean, I have a Bachelors degree and a Masters degree from two top schools, and right now I'm seeing someone who has nothing. But she's going for it and she's gonna get there because she's motivated. You're starting to remind me a little of one of my friends. She always argues that no guys like her and no guys hit on her, and then when I offer to introduce her to perfectly fine guys that she's seen before, "Uhhh ... no." Edited November 28, 2011 by jobaba
Avarage Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Verhrzn you've gotta stop this. Your not a bottom of the barrel person. Quite a few guys on here have said just as much. Considering that your educated, support yourself and have goals in life. Why heck, I think you'd be one person I'd enjoy dating who would be awesome. Just having a stretch of bad luck doesn't define who you are. It how you react that does.
Author verhrzn Posted November 28, 2011 Author Posted November 28, 2011 And you should not have that attitude about migrant workers. Think of it more like ... "They're ambitious people and I respect that, but the language barrier and compatibility would be too much to overcome in a relationship." I'm not sure what you mean about an "attitude" towards migrant workers... I was responding to the first poster who presented it as because I'm unattractive, my only options are guys who would date me for a green card. I made no mention if a guy is hard-working or wealthy or anything... I've said over and over that all I require is a job, though yes, I would like an equal education. If that's too high of a standard (to essentially have what I have, a full time job and a college degree), sue me. You say you don't have standards but you really do. You call the guys you have dated ugly, geeky losers. I have seen the pics and they are decent looking guys. If you want somebody to be attracted to you for your looks, go for different guys. Or go for someone who doesn't care about looks as much. I said the guys I've dated aren't conventionally attractive, and geeky/nerdy. No where did I call them losers (I don't equate geeky = loser.) But I'm in a double bind when I describe the guys I dated... if I call them "attractive" or "good looking" then I'm told the reason I'm single is because I have too high a standards. But if I say the guys weren't the greatest looking (but I was still attracted to them) then I'm accused of dissing them and STILL having too high of standards. A guy who doesn't care about looks that much.... does such a thing even exist? Even on this forum, the closest I've seen are guys who say that personality matters just as much as looks... but that means that looks STILL matter, they just aren't the ONLY thing that matters.
ChessPieceFace Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Sounds like more bad advice. Add "stupid magazines" to the list of things leading you astray.
Feelsgoodman Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 OK, I will. You had the cojones to post your pics. Every Tom, Dick and Harry on this website has said you are decent looking yet you refuse to acknowledge that and continue to wallow in self pity. I'd be thriving off compliments like that and using them as motivation to go find a man if I were you. You say you don't have standards but you really do. You call the guys you have dated ugly, geeky losers. I have seen the pics and they are decent looking guys. If you want somebody to be attracted to you for your looks, go for different guys. Or go for someone who doesn't care about looks as much. Good summary. I've seen the OP's pics and while she is by no means hot, she is not ugly either. In fact, she's pretty average (especially by the standards of the overweight, contemporary American society), which of course means that she is in the same boat as most other American women. Yet, it's obvious that she wants really bad to be hot. She wants to be the kind of woman that every man wants. She wants to be like the hot new girl that her male co-workers all want to meet. Anything short of that is apparently "bottom league".
jobaba Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 A guy who doesn't care about looks that much.... does such a thing even exist? Even on this forum, the closest I've seen are guys who say that personality matters just as much as looks... but that means that looks STILL matter, they just aren't the ONLY thing that matters. Yes. Me for one. I've stated multiple times that I would date someone I had no physical attraction to. Of course, in fairness, I've never had to do it. There were others too. I mean, I know where you're at. I battle self esteem issues with my appearance too. I mean, I really haven't dated much. So every woman I end up dating ends up changing my impression of the female gender. You have to change the game to fit the hand you've been dealt.
Feelsgoodman Posted November 28, 2011 Posted November 28, 2011 Verhrzn you've gotta stop this. Your not a bottom of the barrel person. Quite a few guys on here have said just as much. Considering that your educated, support yourself and have goals in life. Why heck, I think you'd be one person I'd enjoy dating who would be awesome. Just having a stretch of bad luck doesn't define who you are. It how you react that does. For her, being bottom of the barrel is anything short of being a hottie that every man wants.
SteveC80 Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 (edited) Men's dating coaches like Doc Love condition their whole theory of relationships on the woman's level of interest. The male level of interest for these gurus doesn't matter, only hers. So the advice is to never let the woman think she has "got you" 100% or her interest level will begin an inevitable decline. I agree with this partially, but also see merit in positions like QZ's in that approaching a relationship as a Machiavellian exercise in power politics and ROI is the wrong approach. My relationships tend to run better when the woman thinks I'm above her in some way, either intelligence, education, income, career, social value, charm, wit, something, and only has to be in one or two ways. It seems to give her something to look up to and enhances the "strong shoulder" impression that many women are attracted to. Whether you are like that yourself is for you to decide of course. My relationships tend to go straight to hell when the woman starts to perceive that she is better than me. It starts with mild disdain, and then grows to out and out nastiness and bad treatment very quickly. I agree a women wants to look up to her man literally and figureitavely It may not be pc to say but a women loses respect for a man she doesnt fewl is better them her in some way wheter it be status income whatever a women holds in high regards in a relationship Edited November 29, 2011 by SteveC80
ThsAmericanLife Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 I've always looked for men who are self-confident enough not to measure their personal worth by comparing themselves to me. I do not continue to date men who are obsessed with the need to be 'better' than me in order to feel secure in the relationship. For that matter, I don't keep friends who have that outlook either. Friendship and love is not a competition.
Author verhrzn Posted November 29, 2011 Author Posted November 29, 2011 For her, being bottom of the barrel is anything short of being a hottie that every man wants. I'd settle for any, thanks. I've always looked for men who are self-confident enough not to measure their personal worth by comparing themselves to me. I do not continue to date men who are obsessed with the need to be 'better' than me in order to feel secure in the relationship. For that matter, I don't keep friends who have that outlook either. Friendship and love is not a competition. I agree that friendship is not a competition, but... isn't love? I mean, most people only marry one person in the world. They only have sex with a select few. A guy looks at me, looks at another girl, and chooses the other girl because she has something I don't... isn't that exactly what "competition" means?
TheBigQuestion Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 I'd settle for any, thanks. I agree that friendship is not a competition, but... isn't love? I mean, most people only marry one person in the world. They only have sex with a select few. A guy looks at me, looks at another girl, and chooses the other girl because she has something I don't... isn't that exactly what "competition" means? I think she means that love isn't a competition between the two people who are in love. Dating can be a pretty nasty competition.
jobaba Posted November 29, 2011 Posted November 29, 2011 A guy looks at me, looks at another girl, and chooses the other girl because she has something I don't... isn't that exactly what "competition" means? Yea. Dating is a competition. And it's brutal. But you don't have to play the game like the rest. All I want is someone who is non-shallow, compatible, motivated, and cute. And I'm flexible on the cute. And some other guys on this forum feel the same way. If you were to find one of those guys, they wouldn't just drop you for the next prettier girl that came along. I'm starting to believe more and more that dating is about finding the person who approaches the game of dating just like you.
Recommended Posts